Tuesday, June 30, 2015

With each incident of police violence unleashed
on yet another unarmed African-American – another wave of consciousness sweeps
the country as new rebellious uprisings emerge.
There are black and brown communities all over the country – the
constant targets of police violence – who have said no more and are actively
galvanizing, mobilizing, organizing and yes, resisting. There is something emerging in this country
that can longer be contained – and we recently bore witness to that in
Baltimore, Maryland.

For the last two months there’s been relatively two
burning questions asked by those in and out of Baltimore - what exactly happened to Freddy Gray and how did he die? Since Mr. Gray died from horrific spinal injuries
occurring while in police custody - these questions were left unanswered only
for the public to draw their own conclusions – until now. The recent “leaking” of the autopsy report to
the Baltimore Sun is supposed to finally address these questions. The “leaked” autopsy report revealed that Mr. Gray
suffered from what the report described as a “high energy” injury while making
a comparison to injuries suffered from shallow-water diving accidents. The
report states: The type of
fracture/dislocation documented in imaging studies on admission is a high
energy injury most often caused by abrupt deceleration of a rotated head on a
hyperflexed neck, such as seen in shallow water diving incidents.”

Thursday, March 12, 2015

The interim report
recently released by President Obama’s task force on policing will shed some
light on their view of the public trust - a view that is not shared by those
who seek more than just a laundry list of recommendations to address police
violence.The report was released just
days before the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a report of their
investigation into the Ferguson Police Department – a flashpoint of racial
frustrations and deep seated tensions unleashed in the face of aggressive and
excessive policing.A rather scathing
report that detailed the apparent racist activities engaged not just by the
Ferguson police officers but the Ferguson municipal government. However, the
explosiveness of DOJ’s Ferguson report on the Ferguson Police Department should
not be allowed to overshadow the president’s task force interim report because
as the president himself said: “This time will be different,” President Obama
said, regarding the effectiveness of the task force compared to prior ones, “because
the President of the United States is deeply vested in making it different.”

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

Confirmation
hearings were recently held for
President’s Obama’s nominee for U.S. Attorney General, Ms. Loretta Lynch to
replace Eric Holder, who resigned four months ago. Ms. Lynch currently serves as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. If confirmed, Ms. Lynch would be the first
African American woman to lead the Department of Justice – certainly a plus for
the President’s legacy. Since the start of the Obama administration, both the President
and Attorney General – both African Americans – have been the source of some
very intense opposition and hostility from Republicans. When Holder announced
his resignation, he was immediately described as “the most divisive U.S.
Attorney General in modern history” by Republican Congressman Dan Issa, who
serves as Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.This is what Mr. Issa had to say: “Eric
Holder is the most divisive U.S. Attorney General in modern history and, in a
vote supported by 17 Democratic House Members, has the dubious historic
distinction of being the first Attorney General held in criminal contempt by
the U.S. House of Representatives,” said Chairman Issa. “Time and again, Eric
Holder administered justice as the political activist he describes himself as
instead of an unbiased law enforcement official. By needlessly injecting
politics into law enforcement, Attorney General Holder’s legacy has eroded more
confidence in our legal system than any Attorney General before him. Republicans have attacked
Mr. Holder on critical national issues such as voting rights, terrorism, and
immigration while pointing to controversial issues such as the Fast and Furious
and IRS scandals.

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Typically
the president uses the State of the Union to outline their political agenda for
the year as well as their vision for the nation. The president makes his address not just to both
chambers of Congress but also to the players of national government who are in
attendance – members of the President’s cabinet, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and
Supreme Court justices.The State of the
Union provides an annual opportunity to identify those critical political issues
as the national priorities. Yet despite heavy losses suffered by the Democrats in
the 2014 mid-terms, President Obama appeared before the nation apparently bolstered
by recent reports of higher approval ratings.Just a few days ago President Obama delivered his sixth State of the Union address where he outlined the accomplishments and achievements of his
administration, “…Tonight, after a breakthrough year for
America, our economy is growing and creating jobs at the fastest pace since
1999. Our unemployment rate is now lower than it was before the financial
crisis. More of our kids are graduating than ever before; more of our people
are insured than ever before; we are as free from the grip of foreign oil as
we’ve been in almost 30 years.”﻿

Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

Appearing assertive at times, President
Obama challenged House and Senate Republicans on policy items such as tax hikes
on the wealthy and raising the minimum wage while issuing threats of presidential
veto. The president focused on the economy and what he termed as “middle-class
economics”.The President explained: “…That’s what middle-class economics is – the idea that this country does
best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and
everyone plays by the same set of rules. We don’t just want everyone to share
in America’s success – we want everyone to contribute to our success. So what
does middle-class economics require in our time?President Obama continues, “First – middle-class economics means helping working families feel more
secure in a world of constant change. That means helping folks afford
childcare, college, health care, a home, retirement – and my budget will
address each of these issues, lowering the taxes of working families and
putting thousands of dollars back into their pockets each year.”﻿﻿﻿﻿

Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

﻿﻿﻿﻿The president actually had a
pretty short wish list that includes proposals to provide millions of workers a
week of paid sick leave, lower community college tuition to zero, and rebuild
the nation’s infrastructure while producing jobs. “We can’t put the security of families at risk by taking away their
health insurance, or unraveling the new rules on Wall Street, or refighting
past battles on immigration when we’ve got a system to fix. And if a bill comes
to my desk that tries to do any of these things, it will earn my veto,” asserted
President Obama. Internationally,
the president discussed trade agreements, identified climate change as the “greatest
challenge”, mentioned the efforts to fight an Ebola pandemic, renewed his six
year old promise to close Guantanamo Bay - again, and repeated his proposed
changes to an antiquated 50 year old ineffective policy towards Cuba. But this
year’s state of the union address was different – there was a different
feel.The president admitted as much
when he said this year there will be no checklist – his submission of the
budget will suffice. There were no catchy slogans this year where last year,
2014 was to be known as the Year of Action
symbolized by presidential veto and executive orders. The truth is that while﻿﻿﻿ the president is showing higher approval ratings – the critical question
will be whether the higher ratings are enough to enable President Obama steer
the political narrative that will inevitably drive the national debate. Consider for a moment on the heels of
devastating losses in the 2014 elections, the president has now entered the
lame duck years of his presidency, and he will now be facing Republican
majorities in both chambers on Congress – the House and the Senate. Meanwhile the Republican Party's agendahas
set their sights on repealing the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obamacare), anti-abortion bills, and of course,
tax cuts. The president will be hard pressed to move his agenda forward in this
hostile political climate where Republicans are empowered on the national and
state level. "...Imagine if we did something different...” the president asks.But the significance of the president’s state of the
union address is not so much about what was discussed but what was not discussed
– or discussed enough. Issues such as income inequality, K-12 education,
criminal justice reform and policing quickly comes to mind. Disturbing was the
president’s stance on advocating for political prisoners abroad while refusing
to acknowledge America’s political prisoners.Although, the president has proposed transformative changes for community
colleges he remains muted on K-12 education.The president’s plan to address increasing income inequality appears to be based
on his proposal to raise taxes on the high income earners and place fees on the
richest financial institutions and then redistribute the money to pay for free community
college tuition, and tax credits targeted for the middle class – “middle-class
economics” says the president. President Obama never mentioned the poor or
poverty – not even once during the nearly 60 minute speech. But what about the
millions who have not reached middle class status? Or the dim prospects of these
bills passing through a Republican controlled Congress? Certainly the political
drama will be played out before the national stage over the next two years for
all to witness – will the president’s pragmatism get bipartisan support? What
will be the president’s legacy?

But what about criminal
justice reform in the aftermath of the visceral public response to violent
policing? President Obama indeed mentioned
the need for criminal justice reform but in light of the world wide protests
raising the public consciousness about policing – the president failed to cast
his spotlight by not providing details as to what criminal justice reform would look like. He even refused to relent to the obvious symbolism to having the parents of Tamir Rice and Michael Brown, and
the wife of Eric Garner in attendance as his guests: “…We may have different takes on the events of Ferguson and New York. But
surely we can understand a father who fears his son can’t walk home without
being harassed. Surely we can understand the wife who won’t rest until the
police officer she married walks through the front door at the end of his shift,”
President Obama went on to say, “Surely
we can agree it’s a good thing that for the first time in 40 years, the crime
rate and the incarceration rate have come down together, and use that as a
starting point for Democrats and Republicans, community leaders and law
enforcement, to reform America’s criminal justice system so that it protects
and serves us all.” The president’s lack of detail regarding his idea for criminal
justice reform is particularly disappointing considering the Justice Department's recent
refusal to federally charge police officer Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown.

Monday, December 29, 2014

For over a month
now, the world has witnessed a special moment unfolding in America where literally
thousands upon thousands took to the streets in a stunning display of mass
resistance in response to, not one but two recent controversial grand jury
rulings. The world took notice of the rebellious uprisings emerging in city
after city – from Ferguson, Missouri to Brooklyn, New York to Oakland,
California – making their presence felt uptown as well as downtown, in the
‘hood’, and on college campuses. Protestors infiltrated and disrupted holiday
shopping, Thanksgiving parades, Christmas events – brought the nation’s major
highways and the railroads to a stop – gnarling traffic for miles.

Two separate high
profile grand jury proceedings in St. Louis and New York City ruled against
indicting police officers, Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo – in essence
validating their use of deadly force against Michael Brown and Eric Garner,
respectively. The vastly unpopular rulings triggered an incredible wave of mass
resistance protesting against not just the police brutality issue but also against
the abysmal lack of accountability for killing unarmed African American men. The grand jury’s
decision not only exonerated the use of deadly force with no criminal charges
but the decision also reinforced the notion that such deadly force is indeed
the standard operating procedure, particularly when unarmed African Americans
are involved. But there’s more - the grand jury’s decision essentially enables
the uninterrupted freedom of both officers and allows them to return to their
jobs, to walk the beat above ground while the bodies of Michael Brown and Eric
Garner lay buried below ground.

The ruling triggered painful reminders from a wretched racist past.Take for example, the ruling serving as a reminder
of the second-class citizenship that typically characterized Black America in
the days before integration – you know, like when lynching was routine.Another reminder of how unjust and unequal
the criminal justice system is towards the black communities that make up Black
America.Another reminder of the Black
America’s relationship with the police and how different that relationship is
with other communities that make up the nation. Another reminder of the role the
police had during the Civil Rights and Black Power Movements – as the first
line of defense -the brutal enforcers
of Jim Crow and legal segregation. Another reminder of their role with
COINTELPRO. And yet another reminder of the tragic failure of the state to
recognize black humanity.

Consider for a
moment what activist Rosa Clemente recently noted when
she underlined significance of the ruling: “…The grand jury’s refusal to
indict Darren Wilson means that the physical evidence, testimony of witnesses,
police report on the incident, and Wilson’s own inconsistent and implausible
account will never be subject to cross-examination, scrutiny, and comparison
before a jury.”Simply put, Ms. Clemente
nailed it in pointing out the implications when police are left unindicted – no
trial, no public scrutiny, no transparency and certainly no accountability. That’s
why so many are just infuriated with the grand jury refusals to indict, and in
fact, held very little hope for indictments of police officers Darren Wilson
and Daniel Pantaleo.Deep down…we already knew…

Take the Michael
Brown case for instance where there were issues from the start. There were
several events that instilled doubt within the local Ferguson community and
larger extended community who demanded justice. Aside from not having a video
of the shooting, Mr. Brown’s character came under heavy scrutiny, while the
Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. McCullough refused to recuse himself from the case
despite the strong conflict of interests.Doubts around the Brown grand jury grew stronger as leaks spilled out,
at one point, almost daily.For days, all
eyes were squarely riveted on Ferguson as we constantly heard that a decision “was
coming any day now.” We braced ourselves
for the worst… During this time the Governor announced his plan to deploy
the National Guard, and declared a state of emergency…before an emergency.Businesses fortified themselves as if
preparing for a hurricane to blow through town. Schools closed down. Gun sales
hit the roof. And then the announcement was made hours after the day turned into night
- at the nighttime hour of nine o clock - Darren
Wilson will not be indicted.The
Ferguson community erupted at the news and the rebellious uprising was in full
swing quickly spreading across the country like California wildfire.To make matters worse, we gradually learned
about disturbing issues with the grand jury – first, the inconsistent
presentation of evidence, and most recently, the apparent issues with lying
witnesses.

Then less than two weeks after
the Brown grand jury decision, the Garner grand jury decided not to indict NYPD
Officer Daniel Pantaleo. Despite the cellphone video showing an illegal
chokehold used on Mr. Garner by Mr. Pantaleo as well as Chief Examiners Report thatruled Mr. Garner’s death a homicide!Just like the Brown case, there were issues
with the Garner case from the start – community demands for a special
prosecutor, concerns regarding a jury pool being picked from a biased
pro-police Staten Island community and the Staten Island District Attorney
seemingly delaying the grand jury process considering they didn’t start hearing
evidence until nearly October – almost three months after Mr. Garner was killed. To make matters worse, nearly ten days after the Brown
grand jury ruling, the Garner grand jury was announced and the public response was
both swift and fierce with a flurry of daily protests around the country.

And then two New
York City police officers were gunned down on a Saturday afternoon – and you
can sense the gradual shift in the narrative as the pro-police forces began to
assert themselves. The police killing was immediately linked to the protests,
and echoed loudly with inflammatory commentary by police union chief Pat Lynch,
former governor George Pataki and former mayor Rudy Guiliani.Ironically though, calls were made to halt
the protests against the police violence while making no mention of stopping
the pro-police protest rallies or their divisive rhetoric.Nonetheless a debate quickly emerged – should the protests continue in light of the
two dead NYPD officers?But the real
question is not whether the protests should continue or not but rather - When will police officers be held accountable for their criminal use of deadly force?

Meanwhile, the
protest demonstrations continued unabated – and for a few good reasons. Let’s
see, the issue of police brutality and violence has become a national crisis. An issue that has been ongoing for many years
with no apparent repercussions or consequences for police use of excessive
deadly force. The police officers routinely get the benefit of the doubt
regardless of the questionable circumstances that ultimately feeds doubt.And then, aside from the Brown and Garner
grand jury rulings, police officers were also not indicted in grand jury cases
for Ezell Ford, John Crawford, Jonathan Baker, and Keyarika Diggles.Yes – the protests have continued…and for
good reason.

Monday, November 24, 2014

While
the 2014 elections showed Democrats their difficulties in defeating Republicans,
the elections also revealed the problem the Democratic Party has in appealing
to their white constituents. The Democrats now find themselves in a very precarious
position as they find a way to put together a message that resonates with the
white as well as the black voter. Let’s consider for a moment the 2014 exit poll, particularly the questions about race relations. For example, 40% said race relations in the country had stayed about the same in the
last few years. 38% said they had gotten worse while 20% said they’ve gotten
better. Certainly no surprise here but let’s consider remarks made by the Congressional
Black Caucus Chairperson, Marcia Fudge
(D-OH) when she stated that Democrats lost the white Southerners due in part to racism. “Democrats
lost Senate control because we failed to mobilize young voters across racial
and regional spectrums. We failed to persuade Southern voters to hold true to
core Democratic values. We lost because the Hispanic community was
insufficiently motivated. We lost because of ideological differences within the
Democratic Party and with our Administration. We lost because our party has, to
some extent, lost white Southerners due in part to the race of our President.
We lost because the Supreme Court decisions in Citizens United and McCutcheon allowed a select few to subvert
the political process with secret, unlimited money. We lost because of
gerrymandering in our state redistricting processes. We lost because of our
continuing problem with a clear and compelling message that would encourage
voters to stay with us.Let the talking
heads do what they do best: talk. But let’s be very clear in our analyses of
the 2014 midterm elections. African Americans showed up. So don’t blame us! A review of the
2014 exit poll data verifies Rep. Fudge’s statement as the data indicates that
while voter turnout for Hispanics and Blacks increased, the voter turnout for
Whites went down, and overall turnout was quite low.

The nation’s
political landscape is remarkably more Republican now with their decisive
victories a couple of weeks ago during the 2014 elections. Just in case you
forgot – not only did Democrats lose on the national level but they suffered
losses on the state level as well. For example, Democrats lost their only
majority in the US Congress – in the Senate and they lost seats in the House of
Representatives. Now bear in mind Democrats lost seats in state legislatures
all across the country and a few key governorships in Democratic Party
territory – like in Illinois, Massachusetts, and the biggest surprise in
Maryland.This is what the National
Conference of State Legislature had to say: “It appears that Republicans will have a net
gain of between 300 and 350 seats and control over 4,100 of the nation’s 7,383
legislative seats. That is their highest number of legislators since 1920.
Republicans gained seats in every region of the country and in all but about a
dozen legislative chambers that were up this year. It appears that Republicans
will have a net gain of between 300 and 350 seats and control over 4,100 of the
nation’s 7,383 legislative seats. That is their highest number of legislators
since 1920. Republicans gained seats in every region of the country and in all
but about a dozen legislative chambers that were up this year.” So what does that mean
– what does the current political landscape look like – Republicans now control
23 out of 50 state governments, that means both chambers of the state legislature
and theGovernor are all
Republican.They are Republican majorities in 30 state
legislatures as well as in 68 legislative chambers (one of the two houses that
typically makes up state government). Lastly, there are 31 Republican
governors sitting in state capitols across the country.Clearly the 2014 elections
has empowered the Republicans as the lines of battle are redrawn...at least until
the 2016 elections. You can already sense the tension quickly building as President Obama spoke of his intention to take executive action to address immigration reform
while Republicans counter by suing the president over the Affordable Care Act. The
first of many battles to come over the next two years...